Philip Johnston has been with the Daily Telegraph for more than 20 years. He is currently assistant editor and leader writer and was previously home affairs editor and chief political correspondent.

Changes at the chamber

Since Labour came to power in 1997 there have been many changes to the way parliament operates. When I first worked there in the early 1980s, prime minister's questions was twice weekly, the House regularly sat until 10pm and voted at that time, often in conditions of high drama, fuelled by the odd drink or two from the plethora of bars around the Palace of Westminster.

The CommonsÂ has become more remote sinceÂ 1997

Tony Blair ushered in more "family friendly" hours. The House rarely sits after 7pm and while a good deal goes on outside the chamber, with debates in Westminster Hall and a lively select committee scene; parliament is no longer the bearpit it once was.

By having just one Question Time a week, it is more difficult than it once was to keep the PM on the ropes over a particular issue, like dodgy donations to Labour – or anything else for that matter.

In a report aimed at reviving the almost moribund role of backbench MP, the Commons select committee on modernisation suggested there should be a weekly debate lasting 90 minutes to discuss topical matters.Â

The Government agreed, conceding – somewhat belatedly – that a certain immediacy was absent from much of parliament's deliberations because debates were planned well in advance and the issues of the day were not being discussed.

These weekly topical debates were introduced a few weeks ago and so far MPs have discussed immigration and climate change, which while laudable, are not exactly immediate in their topicality.

There is another "topical debate" today. What do you think it should cover? Lost data? Donations to political parties, perhaps.

The hot topic that the Government has tabled for discussion is "The future prospects for apprentices". And who decides what is topical? None other than Harriet Harman, the Leader of the Commons. No wonder they are not talking about party donations.

This is yet another innovation, carried out in the name of modernisation, that will make the Commons look even more remote from the real world than it already does.Â